Cselekedetek 5:3

Biblia Karoli Gaspar

Monda pedig Péter: Anániás, miért foglalta el a Sátán a te szívedet, hogy megcsald a Szent Lelket, és a mezõnek árából félre tégy?

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

why: Genesis 3:13-17, 1 Kings 22:21, 1 Kings 22:22, 1 Chronicles 21:1-3, Matthew 4:3-11, Matthew 13:19, Luke 22:3, John 13:2, John 13:27, Ephesians 6:11-16, James 4:7, 1 Peter 5:8, Revelation 12:9-11

lie to: or, deceive, Acts 5:9, Job 22:13, Psalms 94:7-9, Isaiah 29:15, Jeremiah 23:24, Hosea 11:12

to keep: Numbers 30:2, Deuteronomy 23:21, Proverbs 20:25, Ecclesiastes 5:4, Romans 2:21, Romans 2:22

Reciprocal: Genesis 4:10 - crieth Exodus 8:29 - deal Leviticus 19:11 - lie one 1 Kings 14:6 - why feignest 2 Kings 1:10 - If I be a man 2 Kings 5:22 - My master 2 Kings 5:25 - Thy servant Esther 7:5 - that durst Job 15:12 - thine heart Psalms 139:3 - and art acquainted Proverbs 12:19 - but Isaiah 32:6 - and his heart Isaiah 57:11 - that thou Isaiah 59:13 - lying Ezekiel 38:10 - that at Matthew 9:4 - Wherefore Matthew 24:48 - say Matthew 26:72 - with Mark 2:8 - Why Mark 4:15 - Satan Luke 5:22 - What Luke 6:45 - and an Luke 11:39 - but John 8:44 - When John 14:26 - Holy Ghost Acts 5:4 - thou hast 1 Corinthians 12:10 - discerning 2 Corinthians 10:6 - in Ephesians 2:2 - the spirit Ephesians 4:25 - putting Ephesians 4:27 - General 1 Thessalonians 4:8 - who 2 Timothy 2:26 - at Titus 2:10 - purloining James 3:6 - it is

Gill's Notes on the Bible

But Peter said, Ananias,.... Peter, by divine revelation, or by a spirit of discerning, such as Elisha had, who knew what his servant Gehazi had done, knowing what a reserve Ananias had made, calls him by his name, and says to him,

why hath Satan filled thine heart? or emboldened thee, given thee so much spirit and courage to act in such an impudent and audacious manner; so the phrase is used in Esther 7:5 see the Septuagint there, and often in Talmudic writings.

"Says R. Joshua, I never מלאני לבי, "filled my heart"; or my heart never filled me to say to a man, go and take the change of these three things, c. d.''

And says another Rabbi e,

"though I say so, לא מלאני לבי, "I never filled my heart", or my heart never filled me to transgress the words of the companions''

that is, I never durst do so. And again f, it being observed, that Isaiah should say, "hear, O heavens!" it is said,

"who, or what is this, who מלאו לבו, "hath filled his heart", or whose heart has filled him to call to the heavens to hear.''

But this instance of Ananias was such, that none but Satan could have put him upon, or emboldened him to have done; who from hence appeared to have the power over him, and to have possessed him, to have great access to him, even to his heart, and great influence upon it, so as to prompt him

to lie to the Holy Ghost; who was in the apostles, and by whom they were acted, and to whom he had given a discerning of spirits; so that it was a daring action, and downright madness, to go about to deceive them: or he pretended he had an impulse from the Spirit of God to sell his estate, and give the whole price of it to the apostles, and yet kept back part of it; which was acting contrary to that Spirit he pretended to be influenced by.

And to keep back part of the price of the land: that is, he lied against the Holy Ghost, by keeping back part of the price the land was sold for; when he had declared he sold it with this view, to give the whole for charitable uses, and affirmed that what he brought was the whole.

d T. Hieros. Maaserot, fol. 48. 4. e Sabbat, fol. 14. 3. f Tzeror Hammor, fol. 160. 1. Vid. Shaare ora, fol. 2. 1.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

But Peter said ... - Peter could have known this only by “revelation.” It was the manifest design of Ananias to deceive; nor was there any way of detecting him but by its being revealed to him by the Spirit of God. As it was an instance of enormous wickedness, and as it was very important to detect and punish the crime, it was made known to Peter directly by God.

Why hath Satan - Great deeds of wickedness in the Scripture are traced to the influence of Satan. Compare Luke 23:3; John 13:27. Especially is Satan called the “father of lies,” John 8:44-45. Compare Genesis 3:1-5. As this was an act of “falsehood,” or an attempt to deceive, it is with great propriety traced to the influence of Satan. The sin of Ananias consisted in his “yielding” to the temptation. Nowhere in the Bible are people supposed to be free from guilt from the mere fact that they have been “tempted” to commit it. God requires them to “resist” temptation; and if they “yield” to it, they must be punished.

Filled thine heart - A man’s “heart” or “mind” is “full” of a thing when he is “intent on it”; when he is strongly “impelled to it”; or when he is fully occupied with it. The expression here means that he was “strongly impelled” or “excited” by Satan to this crime.

To lie to - To attempt to deceive. The deception which he meant to practice was to keep back a “part” of the price, while he “pretended” to bring the whole of it; thus “tempting” God, and supposing that he could not detect the fraud.

The Holy Ghost - τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον to pneuma to hagion. The main inquiry here is, whether the apostle Peter intended to designate in this place the “third person” of the Trinity; or whether he meant to speak of God “as God,” without any reference to the distinction of persons; or whether he referred to the “divine influence” which inspired the apostles, without reference to the special offices which are commonly ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Or, in other words, is there a “distinction” here recognized between the Father and the Holy Spirit? That there “is,” will be apparent from the following considerations:

(1) If no such distinction is “intended,” it is remarkable that Peter did not use the usual and customary “name” of God. It does not appear why he guarded it so carefully as to denote that this offence was committed against the “Holy Spirit,” and “the Spirit of the Lord,” Acts 5:9.

(2) The name used here is the one employed in the Scriptures to designate the third person of the Trinity, as implying a distinction from the Father. See Matthew 3:16; Matthew 1:18, Matthew 1:20; Matthew 3:11; Matthew 12:32; Matthew 28:19; Mark 1:8; Mark 3:29; Mark 12:36; Luke 12:10; John 14:26; John 7:39; John 20:22; Acts 4:8; Acts 5:32, etc.

(3) Peter intended, doubtless, to designate an offence as committed particularly against the person, or influence, by which he and the other apostles were inspired. Ananias supposed that he could escape detection, and the offence was one, therefore, against the Inspirer of the apostles. Yet that was the Holy Spirit as “distinct from the Father.” See John 14:16-17, John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-11; John 20:22. Compare Acts 5:32. The offence, therefore, being against him who was “sent” by the Father, and who was appointed to a particular work, clearly supposes that the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father.

(4) A further incidental proof of this may be found in the fact that the sin here committed was one of special magnitude - so great as to be deemed worthy of the immediate and signal vengeance of God. Yet the sin against the Holy Spirit is uniformly represented to be of this description. Compare Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-29. As these sins evidently coincide in enormity, it is clear that the same class of sins is referred to in both places; or, in other words, the sin of Ananias was against the third person of the Trinity. Two remarks may be made here:

(1) The Holy Spirit is a distinct Person from the Father and the Son; or, in other words, there is a distinction of some kind in the divine nature that may be designated by the word “person.” This is clear from the fact that sin is said to have been committed against him - a sin which it was supposed could not be detected. “Sin” cannot be committed against an “attribute” of God, or an “influence” from God. We cannot “lie unto” an attribute, or against wisdom, or power, or goodness; nor can we “lie unto” an “influence,” merely, of the Most High. Sin is committed against a “Being,” not against an “attribute”; and as a sin is here charged on Ananias against “the Holy Spirit,” it follows that the Holy Spirit has a “personal” existence, or that there is such a distinction in the divine essence that it may be proper to “specify” a sin as committed especially against him. In the same way sin may be represented as committed especially against the “Father” when his “name” is blasphemed; when his “dominion” is denied; when his mercy in sending his Son is called in question. Sin may be represented as committed against “the Son” when his atonement is denied; his divinity assailed; his character derided, or his invitations slighted. And thus sin may be represented as committed against “the Holy Spirit” when his office of renewing the heart, or sanctifying the soul, is called in question, or when “his” work is ascribed to some malign or other influence. See Mark 3:22-30. And as sin against the Son proves that he is in some sense distinct from the Father, so does sin against the Holy Spirit prove that in some sense he is distinct from the Father and the Son.

(2) The Holy Spirit is divine. This is proved, because he is represented here as being able to search the heart, and to detect insincerity and hypocrisy. Compare Jeremiah 17:10; 1Ch 28:9; 1 Corinthians 2:10, “The Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God”; Revelation 2:23. And he is expressly “called” God. See the notes on Acts 5:4.

Clarke's Notes on the Bible

Verse Acts 5:3. Why hath Satan filled thine heart — The verb πληροειν, which we translate to fill, Kypke has showed by many examples to signify, to instigate, excite, impel, c., and it was a common belief, as well among the heathens as among the Jews and Christians, that, when a man did evil, he was excited to it by the influence and malice of an evil spirit. It is strange that, by the general consent of mankind, sin against God has been ever considered so perfectly unnatural, and so evil in itself, that no man would commit it unless impelled to it by the agency of the devil. The words of St. Peter here prove that such an agency is not fictitious: if there had been no devil, as some wish and perhaps feel it their interest to believe, or if this devil had no influence on the souls of men, Peter, under the agency of the Holy Spirit, would not have expressed himself in this way for, if the thing were not so, it would have been the most direct means to lead the disciples to form false opinions, or to confirm them in old and absurd prejudices.

To lie to the Holy Ghost — Ψευσασθαι το Πνευμα το Ἁγιον, To deceive the Holy Spirit. Every lie is told with the intention to deceive; and they wished to deceive the apostles, and, in effect, that Holy Spirit under whose influence they professed to act. Lying against the Holy Ghost is in the next verse said to be lying against God; therefore the Holy Ghost is GOD.

To keep back part of the price] Νοσφισασθαι απο της τιμης. The verb νοσφιζειν, νοσφιζεσθαι, is used by the Greek writers to signify purloining part of the public money, peculation. The word is used here with great propriety, as the money for which the estate was sold was public property; as it was for this purpose alone that the sale was made.